The Republican Congress is demonstrating a growing readiness to push back against this Republican President with both words and votes.

The closest a US president has come to anticipating Trump's shockingly bellicose statement was Harry Truman, during the Korean War.

As Commander-in-Chief, President Trump has been superb.

If you're frustrated that this dispute seems stuck with no way out, here are two things worth thinking about.

President Trump likes to apply business-oriented thinking to national economic policy, seeing global trade in terms of individual deals.

It is one thing to be a valued and trusted ally; another matter entirely to be taken for granted.

The United States has reached ‘full employment’ but this hasn’t created satisfactory jobs for a significant part of the work force.

It was always part of the Trump agenda to do something about the North American Free Trade Agreement (‘one of the worst deals ever’) covering the US, Canada and Mexico: the outcome is renegotiation rather than the threatened termination.

The CIA program was trying to apply just enough pressure while also accounting for all weapons, even though it didn’t control them: it was too big an ask.

In three European cities, we've witnessed a variety of reactions to a US president unlike any the world has seen before.

In the uproar over Trump’s speech, is it the borders and civilizations that are resented, or the political duties they imply?

European leaders probably recognise that US presidents are usually difficult on trade issues, and for all his efforts Trump has yet to prove himself more unsatisfactory than his predecessors.

There is much complaining in South Korea and Japan that missile defence is too expensive. The time for this whining is over.

Even if Trump’s toll road serves only the resort, in this specific instance it will not be running afoul of Indonesian law.

There is no indication that Trump’s invitations to Southeast Asian leaders were preceded by diplomacy that would resolve the underlying issues in the bilateral relationships.

Five months into the Trump administration, a surge of progressive outrage has hardly translated into electoral momentum for the Democrats.

If things break bad for Trump, you can expect at least two consequences for US policy toward the Asia-Pacific.

Trump loyalists have started circling the wagons.

The decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement may restrict the US from using climate security rationales to inform grand strategy and foreign policy.

'We will still be there. And we will be there with you'.

The key question is whether Australian overtures to Tillerson and Mattis will inform President Trump’s decision making.

The Trump administration’s backward-looking and isolationist stance is the opposite of what's needed by the industries of the future.

It needs to be understood that Russia views the EU and the West generally as an enemy.

The US President made all the right noises about new business from Vietnam.

Trump is clearly making things worse, but the fraying of the US-Germany partnership is a story as long as the post-Cold War era.

If the economy is already back to full capacity, what hope is there for the many Trump voters who find themselves without satisfying jobs?

Putin must now be tempted to suspect that God is a Russian; or at least on the side of his righteous and much maligned compatriots.

It remains to be seen whether this new phase of ties between the Gulf states and Israel can expand beyond the informal and the unofficial level.

By taking on the FBI, Trump looks like repeating Nixon’s Watergate actions in ways that should truly alarm him – and hearten his opponents.

In the unprecedented chaos that is the Trump presidency, the apparent swing back towards Saudi Arabia seems abnormally normal.

Erdogan was forced to concede on almost everything, even withstanding Trump’s repeated mispronunciation of his name during the press conference.

Most of the most serious consequences have occurred not because of Trump’s actions. But as a result of leaks from within the US intelligence community and the White House.

President Trump doesn’t quite seem to appreciate the need for a nuanced approach to managing competing international obligations.

Too many trade negotiators share the Trump mindset, counting success in terms of how many export-promoting elements are embodied in these bilateral and plurilateral FTAs.

Abrupt swings in policy direction in Asia are detracting from already diminished stocks of US trust and credibility.

The question is whether Republicans will find the political will to act on what the media expose re Trump, members of his administration, and Russia.

Less than a quarter of those surveyed thought that the US-China relations would be friendly, cooperative or cordial in the next 12 months

Asia's leaders know to take the bluster of Trump's initial policy statements with a heaping of salt and await more nuanced follow-up from his senior staff.

President Trump’s first phone contact with three Southeast Asian leaders was to gain their diplomatic support for a US concern in Northeast Asia.

It would be difficult to imagine Turnbull arriving in New York with nothing to offer Trump.

Any progress in terms of trade and investment flows will be incremental, and probably unaffected by politicians posturing.

Trump has set the boundaries back to what they have traditionally been, and put Russia and Iran on notice that Washington's patience has run out.

China would feel more assured if Xi’s American host would repeat his support for the One China policy.

The issues Trump and Xi do not discuss may be as telling as those they do.

If Trump can’t get a handle on Washington’s politics – not least the requirement to work with Congress – US foreign policy will suffer.

There are other, more reliable ways of signalling US commitment to the region.

Anyone who thinks that Tillerson’s quiet deal-making style signals a new kind of appeasement towards Beijing simply isn’t paying attention.

Merkel and Trump may be contrasting personalities, but this is not necessarily a handicap to a functional, pragmatic relationship.

Is McMaster a man who knows how to deal with top US military leaders simply because he had exposed their weaknesses in his book?

Trump’s America may use its size and dominance to advance its interests with little regard for an economic rules-based order.